23 ATTACHMENT 2 - Laserfiche WebLink

softened. The subcommittee would like someone to educate the public about the questions that applicants will have and to help them through the process. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission review and consider the Draft Energy Element and provide direction to staff for any amendments prior to it moving forward to the City Council. Recommendations for amendments were included in Attachment 3. Commissioner Fox advised that she would recuse herself from discussion regarding Policy 13 and Policy 18 (Pleasanton Unified School District) because the District has initiated litigation against a family member. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Blank whether there were any mandates or requirements in the document, Ms. Stern confirmed that Policy 3 called for "new regulations, guidelines, or incentives to reduce demand for electricity and natural gas." Mr. Baker summarized the history and makeup of the Pleasanton Energy Committee, which sunsetted after its two-year charter; it continues as the Energy Advisory Group. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Vanessa Kawaihu, 871 Sycamore Road, noted that she read the Draft Element online and had not seen Attachment 3 until this meeting. She expressed concern about Policy 3, Program 3.5 and requested that language be lightened up to help the older communities when they sell. She did not believe it made any sense to improve their roof to be PV-cell-ready prior to sale because the majority of the homes would be razed. She noted that Policy 4, Program 4.1 should be more flexible if the passive solar would be captured regarding configuration of front-door placement. She liked the fact that much of Policy 7, Programs 7.2 to 7.5 was struck. She noted that Policy 22, Program 21.1 (synchronizing lights) may cause a problem in constrained gateways with respect to acceleration and deceleration of cars, if every car must stop before entering Pleasanton. She noted that the Ace Train was good but that it should have a permanent station to make it a good part of the energy program. Otherwise, she liked the Draft Element. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Roberts commented that the Introduction contained a lot of flowery language. She believed the reference to the United Nations and the use of its definition of "sustainable" was politically unwise and that the Committee's own definition of what is sustainable would be more succinct and less verbose. She would like to see that rewritten. Commissioner Arkin concurred with Commissioner Roberts' comment and would like to see language stating why the City was taking this step. The Commissioners concurred with that suggestion and believed the entire "Purpose" section should be rewritten to specifically address the City's goals. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Arkin regarding the definition of sustainability, Ms. Stern stated that it encompassed the concept of not robbing the next generation of resources and to operate within resources that are already available. In addition, it included the development of renewable energy resources. EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 25, 2005 Page 2 of 6